If only there were more Sulaiman Al Hamris

By Robert Horenstein

article created on:

Admittedly, I was quite skeptical when I first heard about Sulaiman Al Hamri, a young Palestinian from Bethlehem. But after listening to him address a mostly Jewish audience at Congregation Neveh Shalom earlier this month, I couldn't help but think: What would it take to produce more Sulaiman Al Hamris?

Al Hamri is a member of "Combatants for Peace," a small movement of Palestinians and Israelis who are committed to pursuing a non-violent resolution to their decades-old conflict. Having renounced violence—this after spending four years in Israeli prisons for what he calls "resistance" activities in the West Bank—Al Hamri is a Palestinian anomaly and, according to some of his own people, a "traitor."

"We [Palestinians and Israelis] won't achieve anything if we keep fighting and killing each other," he said.

Predictably, he made no distinction between Palestinian terrorism and Israeli military operations, thus implying a moral equivalency between the intentional targeting of civilians and defensive measures intended to thwart such attacks. Even so, who could argue with the notion that if most Palestinians were to think like him, there would be a real chance for peace?

So again, I ask: What would it take to produce a critical mass of Sulaiman Al Hamris?

Some, including well-meaning Jewish groups on the left (e.g., Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, which sponsored the Combatants for Peace 22-city U.S. tour), believe the solution lies predominantly with Israel. Or to be more precise, with Israel's readiness to make further concessions to the Palestinians.

It's a familiar refrain. If only Israel would release millions of dollars in tax revenues it collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority (it did). If only Israel would exercise restraint in Gaza (it has—and Qassam rockets continue to rain down on the northern Negev town of Sderot). If only Israel would negotiate with the incipient Palestinian "unity" government (which steadfastly rejects Israel's right to exist).

If only Israel would take these actions, it would bolster the "moderates," such as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, his Fatah faction—and those Palestinians who think like Sulaiman Al Hamri.

The problem with this logic is two-fold.

First, it overstates the existence of Palestinian moderates (the organizers of the program at Neveh Shalom claimed that Al Hamri's views are shared by a majority of Palestinians even though Palestinian opinion polls contradict this assertion).

Second, it doesn't hold Palestinian leaders accountable for utterly failing to prepare their people for peace.

With respect to the first point, "moderate," it should be noted, is a relative term. Compared to the radical Islamists, Abbas may seem like a moderate, and, indeed, Israel has tried to strengthen his position vis-?-vis Hamas. Appearances, however, can be deceiving.

Late last year, for example, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered the Palestinians a political horizon in return for the formation of a Palestinian government that would renounce violence, recognize Israel and abide by previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements. In an extraordinary national address, Olmert declared that Israel would "agree to the evacuation of many territories and [Jewish settlements]" in order to allow for the establishment of a "viable Palestinian state with territorial contiguity."

What was Abbas' response? At a rally in Ramallah on Jan. 11, he urged Palestinians to halt their internecine violence and instead "direct our guns against the Israeli occupation." Less than three weeks later—and just days after Israel handed over $100 million in frozen tax revenues to Abbas' control—he got his wish: a suicide bombing killed three Israelis at a bakery in Eilat, an attack for which Fatah claimed responsibility.

With moderates like that, who needs extremists?

Nor is it only on the issue of terrorism that the lines between Abbas and the hard-liners are blurred. At the same Ramallah rally, Abbas declared that the so-called Palestinian right of return is "nonnegotiable." Of course, the resettlement in Israel of millions of Palestinians refugees—a demand President Clinton once characterized as "undermining the whole logic of peace"—would mean the elimination of the Jewish state.

The fact is Israeli concessions (see, Oslo peace process and Gaza disengagement) and gestures of goodwill don't engender a meaningful level of Palestinian moderation.

Why? The reason can be found in mosques all over the West Bank and Gaza where Muslim clerics exhort their followers to hate Jews and glorify those who kill them. It can be found in the longstanding Palestinian Authority practice of naming schools, streets and youth sports teams after suicide bombers. It can be found in the newest editions of Palestinian textbooks that, according to a report recently issued by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, "profoundly poison the minds of [Palestinian] children."

My criticism of "Combatants for Peace" isn't that a Jewish group featured a Palestinian speaker. It's that there wasn't an honest discussion about the scarcity of moderate voices on the Palestinian side. Despite Israel's withdrawal from Gaza and its willingness to trade most of the West Bank for a true peace, it's still common wisdom to blame the "occupation." Doing so makes it easy to justify the total absence of any significant organized Palestinian peace camp.

Undeniably, Sulaiman Al Hamri is a courageous individual. But until a leader emerges who's willing to lead the Palestinians away from the hateful ideology that has taken hold among so many of his compatriots, regrettably, he'll remain an anomaly.

Robert Horenstein directs the Jewish Federation of Greater Portland Community Relations Committee.